The proposed measure would prevent individuals from being barred from participating in public programs if they choose to use public funds at a religious provider. Essentially, the measure moves to repeal the state's ban of public dollars for religious funding, also known as the "Blaine Amendment."[1][2][3]

The measure requires 60 percent voter approval for adoption.

On December 14, 2011 Leon County Circuit Judge Terry Lewis ruled that the legislatively-proposed measure would no longer appear on the 2012 ballot. However, a new state law which was not overturned by the lawsuit, allows the Florida Attorney General to rewrite the proposal. This must have been done within 10 days, according to that law, which it was.[4] Read more about the lawsuit here.

Text of measure

Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution providing that no individual or entity may be denied, on the basis of religious identity or belief, governmental benefits, funding, or other support, except as required by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and deleting the prohibition against using revenues from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.

Constitutional changes

There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace, or safety. No individual or entity may be discriminated against or barred from receiving funding on the basis of religious identity or belief.No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.

On July 20, 2011 the Florida Education Association (FEA) along with an inter-faith clergy group and some school administrators filed a lawsuit to block the proposed measure.[7] Also involved in the suit is Lee Swift, president of the Florida School Board Association, and Susan Summers-Persis, president of the Florida Association of School Administrators. Opponents argue that the measure's title and ballot summary are misleading. FEA describes the proposed measure as an "underhanded attempt to legalize state tuition vouchers for private schools, including church-affiliated schools."[8] "This is designed to open up the state treasury to voucher schools, but that's not what the title of the amendment and the ballot summary say," said union president Andy Ford.[9]

Measure supporter Rep. Scott Plakon said, "They are trying to paint a picture that if this is repealed that the state is going to put a million dollar check in the offering of the Baptist Church and that is simply them being untruthful. All this does is make sure that our constitution does not treat people of faith differently than any others."[9]

In response, Rep. Scott Randolph said, "Throughout the 2011 legislative session, Republican legislators disguised the proposed constitutional amendment as one that would merely protect religious freedom and end religious discrimination. But in actuality, this proposal has one purpose: to allow the unlimited use of taxpayers’ money to send children to private schools instead of building a quality public school system."[10]

The case was heard by Judge Terry Lewis. The case (Shapiro v. Browning) number is 2011-CA-1892.

Court ruling

On December 14, 2011 Leon County Circuit Judge Terry Lewis ruled that the legislatively-proposed measure would no longer appear on the 2012 ballot. Specifically, Lewis ruled that the phrase "consistent with the U.S. Constitution" was ambiguous and misleading. The phrase, Lewis said, implies that it would make the Florida Constitution conform with the U.S. Constitution's 1st Amendment.[4]

The lawsuit also challenged 2011 legislation that allows for the Florida Attorney General's office to rewrite ballot summaries or titles when the Florida Supreme Court removes a certified measure from the statewide ballot. Lewis rejected that challenge. "The law under review does not, after all, give the Attorney General authority to re-write the amendment itself -- only the description of it," Lewis said.[4]

Because the 2011 state law was not overturned, the Florida Attorney General still maintained the authority to rewrite the proposal. This was done within 10 days, which was the allotted time to do so.

Measure re-written

The new language of the proposal reads: "Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution providing that no individual or entity may be denied, on the basis of religious identity or belief, governmental benefits, funding, or other support, except as required by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and deleting the prohibition against using revenues from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution."[5]

Despite new language, some argue that the measure remains misleading. Rabbi Merrill Shapiro of First Congregation Sons of Israel and the primary plaintiff in the case said that Amendment 7 would repeal provisions in the Florida Constitution to prohibit the use of public funds for religious institutions. However, Shapiro notes that the current ballot language does not make that clear.[15] Howard Simon, the executive director of the ACLU of Florida, said "the proposal continues to mislead voters by failing to inform them of the chief purpose and actual impact of the amendment – to virtually require taxpayer funding of religious activities of churches, mosques and synagogues."[16]

In early January 2012 a lawyer for the education groups and clergy members said that they did not plan to pursue a legal challenge against the revised language.[17]

Path to the ballot

In order to qualify for the November 2012 ballot the proposed amendment requires approval by a minimum of 60% in the both the House and the Senate. On April 27, 2011 the House voted 81-35 on HJR 1471. The Senate gave final approval to refer the measure to the statewide ballot on May 6 following a 26-10 vote.[18][19]

Timeline

The following is a timeline of events surrounding the measure:

Event

Date

Developments

Approval

Apr. 27, 2011

The House voted 81-35 in favor of the measure.

Final approval

May 6, 2011

Senate gave final approval to refer the measure to the statewide ballot.